Conservatives and liberals are equally generous in their donation habits. This
pattern holds at both the individual and state level, and contradicts the
conventional wisdom that partisans differ in their generosity.

What about the claim by Arthur Brooks that conservatives give more? Margolis
and Sances write:

We are not the first to ask whether partisanship affects giving. In 2006, Arthur
Brooks made headlines with a provocative finding from his book Who Really Cares:
despite stereotypes of liberals caring more about the poor, conservatives were
purported to be more generous when it comes to giving to charities. These
results stirred the political pot by taking “bleeding heart liberals” to task
for their stinginess when it comes to their own money. . . . we demonstrate that
these results are not robust, and appear to be driven by a non-traditional
question wording for identifying liberals and conservatives. After correcting
for this problem, there is no statistical difference between conservative and
liberal giving, conditional on observable characteristics. Further, when we use
partisanship rather than ideology to measure liberalism, there is no statistical
difference in giving, regardless of whether we adjust for observable
characteristics. ...

Where do liberals and conservatives give their money?

While levels of giving are roughly equivalent, liberals are much more likely to
donate to secular organizations, and conservatives are more likely to donate to
religious causes, especially their own congregation. ...

I’m impressed by this work, partly because a few years ago when I
saw Brooks’s
claim, I contacted him and asked for details on what he did, and then I threw
the problem to some students to replicate it. They got tired and never did it.

P.S. Recently, Arthur Brooks has been
having some trouble with the General Social Survey. Working with data can be
difficult!

Conservatives and liberals are equally generous in their donation habits. This
pattern holds at both the individual and state level, and contradicts the
conventional wisdom that partisans differ in their generosity.

What about the claim by Arthur Brooks that conservatives give more? Margolis
and Sances write:

We are not the first to ask whether partisanship affects giving. In 2006, Arthur
Brooks made headlines with a provocative finding from his book Who Really Cares:
despite stereotypes of liberals caring more about the poor, conservatives were
purported to be more generous when it comes to giving to charities. These
results stirred the political pot by taking “bleeding heart liberals” to task
for their stinginess when it comes to their own money. . . . we demonstrate that
these results are not robust, and appear to be driven by a non-traditional
question wording for identifying liberals and conservatives. After correcting
for this problem, there is no statistical difference between conservative and
liberal giving, conditional on observable characteristics. Further, when we use
partisanship rather than ideology to measure liberalism, there is no statistical
difference in giving, regardless of whether we adjust for observable
characteristics. ...

Where do liberals and conservatives give their money?

While levels of giving are roughly equivalent, liberals are much more likely to
donate to secular organizations, and conservatives are more likely to donate to
religious causes, especially their own congregation. ...

I’m impressed by this work, partly because a few years ago when I
saw Brooks’s
claim, I contacted him and asked for details on what he did, and then I threw
the problem to some students to replicate it. They got tired and never did it.

P.S. Recently, Arthur Brooks has been
having some trouble with the General Social Survey. Working with data can be
difficult!